You are here

OpenMarket: Law and Constitution

  • Best Books of 2019: The Narrow Corridor

    December 19, 2019
    Predatory governments with high corruption, that don’t respect political and economic freedoms, are extractive. Countries with these sorts of institutions tend to be both poor and repressive. Countries with inclusive institutions, such as strong property rights, democratic accountability, and the rule of law, tend to be both wealthy and free.
  • Best Books of 2019: A Republic, If You Can Keep It

    December 18, 2019
    Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch explains in vivid detail the purpose of the separation of powers in his 2019 book "A Republic, If You Can Keep It." He presents specific examples of what happens when those lines are blurred. He shows how accountability of our government to the American people through their elected representatives is undermined by giving unelected officials unreviewable power to determine the law.
  • USMCA Won't Protect Tech from Trudeau

    December 16, 2019
    A point of contention in the debate over the new U.S., Mexico, Canada (USMCA) trade agreement has been whether or not the final deal will include language inspired by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. Despite opposition from some including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Section 230-type language will be included in the final agreement.
  • Down in Flames: Judge Dismisses New York Climate Lawsuit against ExxonMobil

    December 10, 2019
    New York Supreme Court Justice Barry Ostrager today acquitted ExxonMobil of all charges brought against the company by New York Attorney General Letitia James.
  • Government of Singapore Demonstrates Real Online Censorship

    December 2, 2019
    Singapore’s recent policing of online content provides an instructive example of the difference between private curating of material by platform owners and dangerous curtailing of free speech by governments. 
  • Twitter's Ban on Political Ads Has No First Amendment Implications

    October 31, 2019
    Twitter Chief Executive Jack Dorsey announced that the social media platform will ban all political advertising. This comes on the heels of Facebook’s recent announcement that the company won’t fact check political ads on their platform. Whichever tack tech companies take with their privately owned platforms, there are no First Amendment implications. The First Amendment prevents only the government from making laws that abridge freedom of speech.
  • VIDEO: How to Build a Political System to Protect Liberty

    October 25, 2019
    Our friends at Learn Liberty have started releasing new videos again, and we couldn’t be more excited. One of the most recent, “3 Different Ways Constitutionalism Affect Liberty,” stars Prof. Ilya Somin of George Mason University, who gives us an excellent refresher on how the precise structure of a government’s powers has important implications for maintaining a free society.
  • Trump Administration Challenges Constitutionality of California Climate Pacts

    October 25, 2019
    Just when I thought the Trump administration could not get any bolder in challenging California’s self-anointed power to determine national climate policy, the Department of Justice (DOJ) on Wednesday filed a constitutional challenge to the state’s greenhouse gas emission trading pacts with the Canadian provinces of Québec and Nova Scotia.
  • Cautiously Optimistic about Facebook's New Approach to Speech

    October 23, 2019
    It seems increasingly the case that there is a lot more to like about what Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg has to say than not. His recent speech at Georgetown University, outlining the company’s general direction when it comes to content moderation, is no exception.
  • More Shields and Fewer Swords in Realm of Federal Regulation

    October 11, 2019
    Yesterday the New Civil Liberties Alliance (NCLA) held a fascinating event on one of their marquee cases, Baldwin v. United States (read more in my post from last month—it’s the second of the four cases discussed). The case involves the Internal Revenue Service issuing a tax filing rule that conflicted both with legislation passed by Congress and with centuries-old common law practice.

Pages

Subscribe to OpenMarket: Law and Constitution